Puppet Masters
The Open Skies treaty allows the United States and Russia to fly over each other's territory with planes loaded with certain agreed-upon sensor packages, in order to ensure compliance with arms control agreements and to provide assurance against preparations for various military surprises. Russia has asked the U.S. to agree to an upgrade in the sensor package their planes can carry. (Obviously, the exact nature of these sensor packages and the proposed upgrades is highly classified.) The request would apparently result in a significant increase in Russian spying capabilities; the first response from Pentagon was, according to one government official close to the situation, "You've got to be kidding." But the State Department has been making the case for acceding to the Russians' demands, and the White House seems to be on State's side. The White House has also stonewalled requests for information from the congressional intelligence committees.
House Intelligence Committee chair Mike Rogers is apparently so concerned that he sent the president an unusual public letter Friday. Here's the press release:
"This provocative and unprofessional Russian action is inconsistent with their national protocols and previous agreements on the professional interaction between our militaries," said Colonel Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman.
Warren said a Russian Su-24 aircraft, or Fencer, made 12 passes at low altitude near the USS Donald Cook, a destroyer that has been in the Black Sea since April 10. It appeared to be unarmed, he told reporters.
The incident lasted 90 minutes and took place on Saturday evening while the U.S. ship was conducting a patrol in international waters in the western Black Sea, Warren said. The ship is now in a Romanian port.

A slide from the National Security Agency powerpoint presentation on the PRISM program.
As described in the UK Guardian by Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras and Ewen MacAskill, a 2008 document obtained by whistleblower Edward Snowden states that "one of the NSA's biggest threats is actually from friendly intelligence services, like Israel. There are parameters on what NSA shares with them, but the exchange is so robust, we sometimes share more than we intended."
Nevertheless, in the following year the NSA and the Israeli SIGINT National Unit drafted a top-secret memorandum of understanding (MOU) dated March 2009 under which the NSA would provide raw intelligence to Israel, including on American citizens. The MOU requested Israeli intelligence to "destroy upon recognition" communications going to and from "officials of the Executive Branch (including the White House, Cabinet Departments, and independent agencies), the US House of Representatives and Senate (member and staff) and the US Federal Court system (including, but not limited to, the Supreme Court)" as well as communications of civilian and military personnel on official business of government.
It is not clear if the MOU revealed by Snowden was ever implemented. But if it was, Israeli intelligence services might be receiving little data that they don't already possess - including communications of US government officials and Members of Congress.
The Ukrainian crisis may have seen a flickering light at the end of the tunnel, as politicians from the great powers collided over the former Soviet state are now bringing up the idea of having four-sided talks between the US, EU, Russia and Ukraine itself. But with the east of the Ukraine boiling with new wave of protests, and Kiev's government being fed with unreasonable promises from Washington - whatwill tomorrow hold for the Ukrainians themselves? Are talks a real possibility? Will there be any use of them? To find this out, Sophie talks to Ray McGovern, retired CIA analyst turned whistleblower.
Sophie Shevardnadze: Ray McGovern, retired CIA analyst, whistleblower, political activist, it's really great to have you on our show today. So, we're going to talk about Ukraine as usual. Just recently the US, Russia and the EU have agreed to sit down with Ukraine, in an attempt to resolve this crisis. But, is this a problem to be solved internationally, or is it an internal Ukrainian issue? As a matter of fact, was it ever Ukraine's internal problem?
Ray McGovern: Well, Ukraine, obviously needs to be involved intimately. We can't have the EU and the US and Russia deciding the future of Ukraine, so the answer is Ukraine needs to be involved intimately, but all of them, East and West, and I'm really glad that the adults have taken over now, and what should have happened several weeks ago is happening now. People getting together to figure out how to do this, when no one's security is endangered.
"Blood has been spilled in Ukraine again. The country is on the verge of a civil war. That is sad," Medvedev wrote.
The cause of the Ukrainian tragedy is that the legitimate authorities did not even try to preserve law and order in regions where administrative buildings were seized and "those authorities were nullified", he said.
"Meanwhile, the illegitimate rulers are trying to restore the order they have cynically trampled upon when they took part in an armed revolt and are falling into their own trap," Medvedev wrote.
Action triggered counteraction, and a state crime [the revolt in Kyiv] led to public protests in regions, Medvedev said.
"When you hear those who today head the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry say that Russia is wary of the Geneva meeting and that Russia wants to derail it, do not believe them because this is not true," he said at a press conference after talks with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi.
"Furthermore, you should not believe statements made by the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry alleging that this meeting is not expected to address the internal Ukrainian crisis, but, instead, will allegedly center on steps that the Russian Federation should take. It is a blatant lie. We will gather there in order to discuss the Ukrainian crisis," Lavrov said.

The BRICS countries have already agreed on the amount of authorized capital for the new institutions: $100 billion each
The BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) have made significant progress in setting up structures that would serve as an alternative to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which are dominated by the U.S. and the EU. A currency reserve pool, as a replacement for the IMF, and a BRICS development bank, as a replacement for the World Bank, will begin operating as soon as in 2015, Russian Ambassador at Large Vadim Lukov has said.
Brazil has already drafted a charter for the BRICS Development Bank, while Russia is drawing up intergovernmental agreements on setting the bank up, he added.

Ukrainian troops ride tanks on the way toward Slovyanks on Monday where pro-Russian activists are occupying buildings
Armed pro-Russian separatists seized more buildings in eastern Ukraine earlier in the day, expanding their control after the government failed to follow through on a threatened military crackdown.
In a call on Monday night that the White House said Moscow requested, the US president told Putin that those forces were threatening to undermine and destabilise the government in Kiev.
"The president emphasised that all irregular forces in the country need to lay down their arms, and he urged president Putin to use his influence with these armed, pro-Russian groups to convince them to depart the buildings they have seized," the White House said in a statement.
Fast forward to 2012. Public Health England reported that death rates, already unusually high during 2012, continues to rise in 2013. The report states that the number of excess deaths in England in 2012-3 had been 23,400 (5%) above ONS expectations. When this was leaked, the Public Health England official with the Orwellian title of 'chief knowledge officer' put out a public statement that "the temporal coincidence with influenza across the UK and Europe suggests that influenza has contributed significantly", and he added that it was "a major explanatory factor".
But the Iraq war was more than a disaster in itself. It was a signifier of new and disturbing times. It wasn't an isolated blunder; it marked the moment when the wider population became fully aware of a new foreign policy posture, developed in Washington, enabled and encouraged by Blair himself. The parody of Blair as US poodle diminishes his role in history. He chafed at Bill Clinton's hesitancy to bomb Serbia in 1999 and secretly reassured the Bush administration that it would not be alone in the illegal pursuit of regime change in Iraq as early as May 2002. The attack on Libya in 2011, government enthusiasm for a new bombing campaign against Syria last year, and the current sabre rattling against Russia show that the spirit of the ethics-led aggression Blair championed lives on. Thankfully, it is a deeply unpopular impulse, with substantial majorities calling for an end to foreign military adventures and massive defence spending.










